“Facts are our friends,” says evangelical leader Ed Stetzer, pointing out why we should not resist the facts, no matter what they might tell us. But what happens when people decide they only want “friendly facts” that fit into their preexisting worldview?

The late Daniel Patrick Moynihan used to say, “You’re entitled to your own opinions, but you’re not entitled to your own facts.” He’d have been surprised to see that, in a world of social media and multiple news sources, many Americans now feel entitled to both.

This development is bad news for our nation. One reason our society’s debates are so frustrating is because we do not agree on what is true. A satisfying debate takes place when two people observe a particular situation, offer a good interpretation of that situation, and then explain why their vision is the best way forward. In other words, we look at the facts, interpret the facts, and then push in a certain direction.

But in a world of constantly-flowing, often-contradictory information, we rarely get to have a satisfying debate because we don’t agree on what the situation is. You can’t debate a “good” interpretation or discuss the “best way forward” if there’s no common ground of agreement.

In 2014, I traveled to Rwanda with a team of psychologists, social workers, and counselors to meet with local caregivers, offering training in trauma healing. We visited the Kigeme Congolese refugee camp. There, children greeted us and followed us around, holding hands. The conditions were humbling and sobering. Most of the camp’s 18,000 refugees had already lived there for two years. They had been separated from their families and unsure when or if they’d be able to go home. Yet, they sang for hope of return.

A year later, some refugees like those we met in Rwanda have made their way to us. The United States plans to resettle approximately 50,000 Congolese refugees, and this year, 250 of them relocated to Kentucky. As I visited these new immigrants in Louisville, as a Licensed Clinical Social Worker focused on trauma, I began to see their dramatic transition firsthand.

A Rwandan couple, Jean de Dieu and Pauline Nzeyimana, minister to their city’s refugees by helping with day-to-day tasks. They accompany them to translate for doctor's appointments or school meetings, provide cell phones or household items, advocate for their school needs or children's activities, and guide youth as the settle into American life.

Wise leaders apply their best thinking to the most important things. This is, of course, easier said than done because of the sheer volume of things that leaders are asked or required to think about. Because we are finite and flawed, we have a limited amount of mental capacity. For a leader, there are always hundreds of tasks, problems, and opportunities that could be swimming around in the mind at any given time. So how can a leader create mental capacity?

In his book, The Checklist Manifesto, Atul Gawande says that all problems can be divided into these three categories:

• Simple problems: A simple problem is one that can be solved by following a recipe. Baking a cake, for example, is simple. You just follow the recipe.

• Complicated problems: A complicated problem is really a series of simple problems. It’s a bunch of simple problems connected. Sending a rocket into space is complicated, but a recipe can be developed and replicated.

• Complex problems: A complex problem is one that cannot be exactly replicated or repeated. Parenting a child, for example, is complex. Just because you have raised one does not mean you can raise the next one the same way. Each child is unique.

Today marks the 152nd year anniversary of Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address. Here are five facts about one of history’s most famous — and famously brief — speeches:

1. The Gettysburg Address was not written on the back of an envelope. Despite the popular legend that Lincoln wrote the speech on the train while traveling to Pennsylvania, he probably wrote about half of it before leaving the White House on November 18.

2. Much of the language and thematic content of the speech had been used by Lincoln before. Theradical aspect of the speech was Lincoln’s assertion that the Declaration of Independence — and not the Constitution — was the true expression of the founding fathers’ intentions for their new nation.

A modern parable based on Jesus’ story commonly known as The Good Samaritan, based on Luke’s gospel in the New Testament, chapter 10, verses 29-37.

A man named Farid fell victim to a famine and multi-year civil war in Syria. What the parched ground did not take from him, the numerous fighting factions in his country did. Eventually, with many of his possessions destroyed, he fled his homeland and became a refugee.

During a long and winding journey Farid found himself awaiting entrance to a new country he might call home. Or, where, at the least, he might stay until the war in his home had ended, and he could return.

As he waited, a pastor passed by his way. Recognizing his refugee status, the pastor shouted, “We must secure the borders!” He whipped out his phone, placed a call to the governors office, and implored her not to allow refugees from Syria into their fair state.

Similarly, another Christian came by, and, upon seeing the refugee, crossed to the other side of the road. Holding her children close, she whispered, “Be careful! He’s from Syria, and is most likely an ISIS terrorist in disguise.”

After some time an unbeliever came by. He stopped, introduced himself, and asked the refugee what kind of help he needed. The unbeliever gave assistance, helped with medical care, food, and housing. After a while the two of them became close friends, and, even after Farid was able to return to Syria they maintained contact. A number of years later Farid died peacefully in his sleep.